Not surprisingly, Prudie's response is garbage. She is hearing only this guy's side of the story. No parent in their right mind would go along with a 26-year man being interested in their 16-year old daughter (or even if the gender was reversed). The guy sneaked around with a 16-year old. HE SAYS they are judging him on the past. But how does Prudie know that?

As someone who's in a position of influence giving advice on important topics, she should have a hell of a lot more wisdom and discernment. Could be the guy hasn't changed at all. Could be he will marry this girl and use the cover to continue preying on young girls. Could be a lot of things. But Prudie immediately assumes his version is correct and tells him the daughter should defy her parents.

Fact is, Prudie, the guy could be completely snowing you AND the girl and the parents are the ones that see it. Before you go assuming that parents care nothing for their children and only want to see them miserable well into adulthood, you should do some serious thinking that someone who would sneak around with a 16-year old when he was 26 maybe still has some serious issues.

I can only hope that these two marry, have a daughter, and when she's 16 she starts banging some 26-year-old. I'm sure Dad will be delighted.

if the guy is snowing Prudie, what does it matter what she tells him?

point is, this whole column is based on the LW and there can never be real-life corroboration, talking with the other parties, etc.

BTW, why not "average mom"? are you 16?

Oh please. I know a couple who started dating when the woman was 16 and the man was 29. They got married four years later and had three kids together.

Is it for everyone? Certainly not. But can it work out okay? It certainly can.

I should point out, though, that a major difference between this couple and the the LW's relationship is that the woman's parents already knew the man well and trusted him long before dating their daughter was even thought of. Also, he asked them for permission to take her out on the first date, and *then* asked her.

Ironically, Slate itself has published a refreshingly rational, fact-based, and calm discussion of such issues here:

<link>

The central problem is that we don't want naive teenagers, particularly females, to be taken advantage of by unscrupulous older people, but in our zeal to achieve this goal, we are blurring crucial distinctions, such as those between pre-pubescent children and everyone else, in order to escalate the rhetoric, stigma, and stakes. This does violence to the truth and places our policies and social mores on shaky ground.

No, this is NOT a rationalization of premature behavior or exploitative relationships, but... Just read the article.

Obviously there's much more description that could be offered here. We don't know what events led up to the end of the 26 and 16 year old dating situation. All we know are basic, though one-sided facts...true.

But at this point in both of their lives, they owe no one an explanation of anything. He is not a pedophile if he willingly broke off the relationship at the demand of the under-age girl's parental demands. But now, she's an adult. It sounds like possibly this man is just more worried about parental approval than he should be.